Didn't that group attack an RAF base?

Attack is a strong word for throwing a can of paint.

After the 2024 riots there were mass arrests and prosecution, but only talk about reviewing groups as to whether they should be proscribed.

Why does a member throwing a can of paint get you classed as a terrorist organisation, while organising riots that involve throwing molotov's and causing serious injury not?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_riots

Their initial statement the day of (or after) the action at the RAF base was something like:

  "disabled aircraft using paint and crowbars"

Which even if they didn't use crowbars, then would seem to require the turbines be inspected for alignment and physical damage.

> disabled aircraft using paint and crowbars

Is that "terror"?

Besides, why not prosecute them for their actions, why proscribe the organisation as a terrorist one, while at the same time ignoring groups who commit much more violent offenses (such as the one given) and concentrate on prosecuting "personal responsibility"?

Because if you stir up enough hate some will act on it. You can't hope to control stuff like this by personal responsibility.

I don't know what you are trying to say here.

Is that for or against the governments hypocritical position?

> why proscribe the organisation as a terrorist one, while at the same time ignoring groups who commit much more violent offenses

You seem to completely ignore this.

And violently sledgehammered a female police officer breaking her spine.

and that's terrorism, is it?

i just thought it was GBH, but i'll update my definition if you can cite your sources...

Given that the Palestine Action is a proscribed terrorist organisation under the Terrorism Act, and its co-founder said just one day after the Oct 7 massacre: “When we hear the resistance, the Al-Aqsa flood [Hamas' name for the massacre] we must turn that flood into a tsunami of the whole world.”

Yes.